Sentences with phrase «as judicial reviews of decisions»

Since the Human Rights Act 1998 many cases involving freedom of expression have been decided as judicial reviews of decisions of public authorities.

Not exact matches

The importance of the second and third issues is obvious for decisions about a written constitution, which later was interpreted as involving judicial review of acts of Congress, and for a federal union of states having partial autonomy under a national government.

The decisions of public bodies, such as the Secretary of State (and therefore of RSCs where they assume the powers of the Secretary of State), local authorities and schools can be challenged by way of judicial review and other appropriate proceedings in the High Court.

Undeterred, Friends of the Earth, Solar Century and Home Sun then sought and obtained backing for a legal challenge from High Court Judge Mr Justice Mitting, who said ministers were «proposing to make an unlawful decision» and as a result the court would be «amenable to a judicial review».

It also said that «the judicial review was premature as no decision has yet been taken, and a decision will only be taken after a full analysis of the responses to the consultation».

We are now one of a group of test cases linked for judicial review proceedings — challenging not only particular decisions on ECF but the operation of the scheme as a whole.

restrict the right to an oral hearing in cases where the individual is seeking judicial review of a prior judicial decision, such as the decision of a bench of lay magistrates or the parole board.

The respondents asserted (as characterized by the court) that «the proper function of judicial review is to determine whether the decision itself was reasonable and whether the decision makers had the jurisdiction to make the decision.

Working with specialist lawyers across our firm in sectors such as energy and environment, we provide high quality, pragmatic advice on the judicial review of planning decisions.

Acting as pro bono counsel for Trevor Loke with respect to a judicial review of the Minister of Advanced Education's decision to consent to a law school at Trinity Western University on the basis that such decision violates his equality rights under the Charter.

Our specialist team of lawyers advises on judicial review of planning decisions, as well as statutory challenges for claimants and defendants in the High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.

He therefore concludes that the OMT programme can be reviewed in this preliminary ruling, also because «the alternative — namely declaring an act such as the OMT programme not actionable — would entail the risk of excluding a significant number of decisions of the ECB from all judicial review merely on the ground that they have not been formally adopted and published in the Official Journal» (at 89).

Whereas the sources of Ofsted and the secretary of state's powers make their decisions plainly amenable to judicial review by Shoesmith, it is less clear that judicial review is available as a remedy against her employer.

However, if the decision to dismiss is prima facie amenable to judicial review, the conclusion of Court of Appeal that proceedings in the ET would not be as effective for Shoesmith may be harder to challenge.

Courts on judicial review do view expertise as a valid doctrinal reason for deference, and are willing to put aside their own interpretation of a statute in favour of a decision - maker's.

The primary issue in substantive judicial review should always be what is the nature of the question decided by the administrative decision - maker and who as between the judiciary and the executive or its delegates is best - suited to have the final say in answering it.

Again, Anisminic is sometimes taken as authority for the proposition that unlawful administrative decisions are nullities, that they never existed in the eyes of the law, with the corollary that judges should not have any discretion to refuse judicial review remedies.

In reaching this decision, the High Court undertook a review of past Singapore case law and legal commentary on the nature and purpose of Article 34 (2)(a)(iii), ultimately deciding that «as a matter of policy, to hold that Art 34 (2)(a)(iii) does not apply, where no other limb under Art 34 (2) would be engaged, would allow an arbitral tribunal to immunize its awards against judicial scrutiny by delivering its conclusions on both jurisdiction and merits in a single award», which would have been an «unsatisfactory result».

On judicial review, courts are reluctant to second guess the decision not to grant an adjournment, as the discretion to permit or deny an adjournment «falls squarely within the discretion» of the adjudicator: Senjule v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2013 ONSC 2817.

The respondent in judicial review who seeks to defend the statutory decision will usually assert that reasonableness be applied as the standard of review, such that the reviewing court affords deference to the decision and making it less likely the court will interfere with the decision.

These findings on standard of review are not only consistent with the overall trend in existing jurisprudence concerning the judicial review of FOIP decisions, but are also consistent with the trend towards reasonableness as the standard of review generally in substantive judicial review of statutory interpretation by administrative decision - makers.

As a pupil, Zac was also involved in: R (on the application of RWE Generation UK Plc) v Gas and Electricity Markets Authority [2016] 1 CMLR 17, a challenge against a decision modifying the charges imposed on users of the National Grid (as a pupil assisting Gerard Rothschild); Speed Medical Examination Services Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EWHC 3585, a judicial review challenging reforms to the process for handling whiplash claims (as a pupil assisting Gerard Rothschild); and an application for interim relief by a company that had been redesignated under a European Union sanctions regime (as a pupil assisting Maya LesterAs a pupil, Zac was also involved in: R (on the application of RWE Generation UK Plc) v Gas and Electricity Markets Authority [2016] 1 CMLR 17, a challenge against a decision modifying the charges imposed on users of the National Grid (as a pupil assisting Gerard Rothschild); Speed Medical Examination Services Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EWHC 3585, a judicial review challenging reforms to the process for handling whiplash claims (as a pupil assisting Gerard Rothschild); and an application for interim relief by a company that had been redesignated under a European Union sanctions regime (as a pupil assisting Maya Lesteras a pupil assisting Gerard Rothschild); Speed Medical Examination Services Ltd v Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EWHC 3585, a judicial review challenging reforms to the process for handling whiplash claims (as a pupil assisting Gerard Rothschild); and an application for interim relief by a company that had been redesignated under a European Union sanctions regime (as a pupil assisting Maya Lesteras a pupil assisting Gerard Rothschild); and an application for interim relief by a company that had been redesignated under a European Union sanctions regime (as a pupil assisting Maya Lesteras a pupil assisting Maya Lester).

First of all, the Court was not convinced by the Opinion of the Advocate General (AG) Jääskinen, who proposed that the judicial review of all decisions by the Petitions Committee must be precluded under Article 263 TFEU in so far as those decisions are not challengeable acts within the meaning of that Article.

Simplified, one could conclude that while the negative decision as regards the petition's admissibility is subject to full judicial review of the EU judge, any subsequent decision in regard of a positive petition can not be challenged before the EU courts, regardless of how the Parliament addresses the petition.

It was open in principle to the claimant to bring a challenge by way of judicial review, on the ground of breach of legitimate expectation, to the defendant's decision to terminate her tenancy, just as it was open to her in principle to bring a challenge on Convention grounds against the defendant as a public authority.

The management and allocation of housing stock by a housing trust which is a registered social landlord under the Housing Act 1996, including decisions concerning the termination of a tenancy, is a function of a public nature, with the effect that the registered social landlord is to regarded as a public authority for the purposes of s 6 (3)(b) of the Human Rights Act 1998 and so is amenable to judicial review on conventional public law grounds in respect of its performance of that function.

Acting, led by Hugh Mercer QC, instructed by Tim Russ of Roythornes, for the Claimant in its judicial review of the FSA's decision to impose moratorium on the production of desinewed meat, the European Commission joined as an interested party.

Then, as a firestorm was slowly emerging on social media, the Federal Court released a Statement in Response to the Canadian Judicial Council's Decision to Review the Conduct of Justice Robin Camp dated November 10, 2015.

65 ILCS 5 / 11-13-25 Any special use, variance, rezoning, or other amendment to a zoning ordinance adopted by the corporate authorities of any municipality, home rule or non-home rule, shall be subject to de novo judicial review as a legislative decision, regardless of whether the process of its adoption is considered administrative for other purposes.

In Cuozzo, Justice Breyer noted that appeals may be available when PTAB decisions fail to comport with due process, when the decision goes beyond the «statutory» limits of the AIA, such as when the review is premised on a violation of 35 U.S.C. § 112 (which is not a ground for invalidity available in IPR proceedings), or other judicial «shenanigans.»

In the end, the court was ruling on a judicial review of an administrative decision, and did not see it as «appropriate in such a case to issue declarations that [religious] rights have been breached,» says Tucker.

Today, Sir Stephen Silber (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) dismissed a judicial review challenge brought by a consortium of developers and private landlords against the decision of the London Borough of Croydon to introduce a selective licensing scheme for all private landlords in their borough: R (Croydon Property Forum Limited) v. London Borough of Croydon.

The Ontario Court of Appeal has denied leave to appeal a judicial review of a Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (Tribunal) decision that found an employer's request for an Independent Medical Examination (IME) as part of the accommodation process reasonable in the circumstances.

In July 2017 Gurprit acted as junior counsel in R (on the application of Durand Academy Trust) v OFSTED and the Secretary of State (2017) EWHC 2097 (Admin), an important Judicial Review case; successfully challenging Ofsted's decision to place a school in special measures.

Judicial review acts as a safeguard against such decisions and we have acted on both sides of the argument, often involving an injunction to preserve the current position whilst the Court is ruling on the issue.

Described by Chambers & Partners as «A high - profile team deserving of all its praise», our Actions Against the Police, Civil Liberties and Human Rights team specialises in claims for false imprisonment, assault, malicious prosecution, discrimination, deaths in custody, and the judicial review of decisions taken by public authorities.

Represented the United States Trade Representative (USTR) as respondent in a judicial review before the Federal Court of Appeal brought by the applicants to question the decision of the Canadian International Trade Tribunal in an antidumping and subsidy case where the tribunal held, in favour of the USTR, that there was no injury to the applicants.

And this type of analysis on judicial review necessarily requires that adjudicative decision makers provide adequate reasons, explaining their decisions — and not leave it to the court to fashion possible reasons [16]-- and that there be a complete record — not just what was considered, but everything bearing on the matter that should have been considered, in the case of legislative type decisions such as the adoption of bylaws and rules.

In Dunsmuir, the Supreme Court set out to do two things: first, to simplify the standards of judicial review by eliminating the patent unreasonableness standard, and second, to strike a balance between upholding the rule of law — that is, ensuring that administrative decision makers adhere to the law as written by legislatures — and according sufficient deference to the administrative decision maker to allow them to provide substantive «meat» to the legislative bones.

What this means is that when undertaking Judicial Review functions on a reasonableness standard, the concern is centred on ``... the existence of justification, transparency and intelligibility...», but where it can be shown that the decision, however much a party such as ATCO may not like it, still falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes, Courts of Appeal will be loathe to intervene.

Federal Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck's decision in Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe (Southern District of New York, 2012) is considered the first official judicial endorsement of predictive coding as a way to review documents.

After the former Chief Commissioner of the Alberta Human Rights Commission upheld the Director's dismissal of Mr. Caron's complaint as too trivial to justify a public tribunal hearing, Mr. Caron filed a judicial review application seeking to quash the Commissioner's decision.

Michael has appeared as co-counsel on a number of judicial reviews or appeals from decisions of the administrative tribunals, including decisions of the Ontario Municipal Board, the Ontario College of Pharmacists, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board and the Ontario Securities Commission

Consistent with these earlier reports, the Commission strongly favoured statutory appeals over judicial review as a simpler mechanism for legal oversight that can be calibrated to address the particularities of statutory tribunal decisions, and recommended that legislation contain a right of appeal on questions of law (and in certain instances on questions of fact) to the courts from the exercise of statutory power with only a few exceptions.

He acted for HMRC in Proteus and Samarkand v HMRC -LRB-[2017] EWCA Civ 77), a judicial review challenge to tax decisions taken on film finance schemes; in Eastenders v HMRC [2014] UKSC 34, [2014] 2 WLR 1580 (which concerned the for use of the power to detain goods under section 139 of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979); and in European Brand Trading v HMRC [2016] EWCA Civ 90 (as to the jurisdiction of the Upper Tribunal to determine whether seizure of goods for non-payment of excise duty was lawful).

It's going to take a more thoughtful approach to decision writing, rather than simply including everything, perhaps as a way of «judicial review - proofing» decisions.

At least so long as the laws and administrative decisions invalidated on judicial review are unconstitutional or illegal more often than not, judicial review increases the government's overall compliance with the Rule of Law.

On March 22, 2018, the Federal Court of Appeal (Court) published its decision in The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency, Operating as Access Copyright v Canada, 2018 FCA 58, dismissing Access Copyright's application for judicial review of a decision by the Copyright Board (Board) certifying the royalties that provincial and territorial governments must pay Access Copyright for the reproduction of copyright - protected works.

We are struggling to reconcile parliamentary sovereignty, which suggests giving effect to legislative attempts to insulate administrative decision - makers from judicial review, and the Rule of Law, which, as Dicey himself suggested, requires courts of justice to apply the law.

We have wide experience of coronial law, appearing in inquests as well as claims for judicial review of coroners» decisions.